About your Search

20121027
20121104
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)
some of the tax breaks, such as the breaks on social security payroll taxes can be continued onward from december. i think that's very important to keep money in the hands of the middle class and enabling their spending, and jobs. >> eliot: all the miles you're talking b all of which i'm fully in accord with all predicated with president obama to guide the path. i agree, if he gets the second term. one of the premise that i view and i think you view as one of the misguided policies of mitt romney if you lower the tax breaks you get an outbreak of investment. there was a survey that disputed that. they polled it under political pressure. what is your wisdom as someone who has studied this in great death, would this bring investment as mitt romney high hypothesizes. >> no, between cutting marginal tax rates on the top and creating more jobs or economic growth. clinton increased taxes and we had jobs than when bush cut taxes. yet average economic growth during the years was better than it has been since. look at nations even in germany and europe scandinavia, they have faster economic
this point. the adcdos who came out and said you have to raise taxes. does that puncture the balloon of the entirety of the logic of mitt romney. >> it may puncture it if you want to analyze this in logical terms. >> eliot: you're not saying logic is not in politics. >> i don't think it is right now. you may have fired an aide who wrote a speech like that. i think romney is quite wise not to. the banality of what he says is central. he does not want to spell out what he's going to say. we all point out the budget mass isn't this. that's because he doesn't want it to be there. he wants to talk in glowing generalities and allow everyone to allow mitt romney to be whoever they would like him to be. >> eliot: this is vapid by design. >> oh, yes they change the law and make the crimes legal. this is what obama understood in april of '08. he nailed it. he said these guys changed the rules of the game. allowed them to operate by like bandits, and it was done under george w. bush's watch. there isn't difference between romney and bush. >> that raises the critical question. why doesn't the ro
's willing to raise taxes on the wealthy. and to reduce the military budget down to the level that the -- that the military has requested to pay for it. so this is a very serious matter. as i spent much of my volunteer time working with disabled veterans. in fact, i'm a disabled veteran myself. not very disabled but i have that classification. i intend to devote about half my time working with them and i'm very worried about the budget. >> eliot: sir, i say thank you for what you do, not because you're endorsing president barack obama. regardless of partisanship, what you do. you deserve the public's thanks for it. wrapped up in your answer were a multitude of reasons to support the president. one of them was interesting, you are a supporter of the military said you know what? mitt romney wants to increase defense spending almost without limit. and yet the president is willing to make the hard but smart decisions based upon what the military needs. that seems to go to a fundamental decision, explain that a
and eliminate $4 billion in annual tax breaks for oil and gas companies. he's tried to do that, and of course the republicans have blocked it. that's the good. let's show you the bad. the copenhagen summit which so many people had great hopes for that pretty much got nothing done. they had a voluntary agreement--wow. he has basically abandoned cap and trade. no question the republicans fought him on that, but there was no second effort at all. he has approved the southern half of the keystone pipeline and i tell you the minute he's elected--not the minute, i like to be accurate--but when he's re-elected he'll approve the northern half as well. and of course he brags how he has done more drilling than george w. bush. which is true. now here is president obama talking about in the second presidential debate about how great he is at oil drilling. >> obama: we have increased oil production to the highest levels in 16 years. natural gas production is the highest it's been in decades. we have seen increases in coal production. >> romney: more drilling, more permits and licenses. >> obama: yes, we s
gotta taste this soup. taxes on >>the rich, you're going to destroy our economy." not true! >> eliot: who built that was the question that framed the election for a month during the convention season. as the republican party tried to mock the sensible and correct argument made by president obama, the government had, in fact, built much of what made our economy tick. from many of the essential pieces of our infrastructure to thethe great public universities that produce ground-breaking technology and funding research and development all of this is what permits and helps our economy to forge ahead. and put aside for the moment that the speakers at the republican convention took the president's statement totally out of context asserting that the president claimed government built the businesses, not the surrounding infrastructure that permits businesses to drive. ignoring the facts speaker after speaker came to the podium at the republican convention and said mockingly, we built that. as if to debunk the need for government. the speeches, in fact, captured the disdain that romney encour
with this mitt romney who is more concerned about making sure that the wealthy don't pay their taxes than the needs of this country are really taken care of. >> cenk: and one more thing about this, you know, as you look at mitt romney from back then through the lens of what you know today about how much he has changed all of his positions, do you think that maybe you were duped that he was not a moderate guy? that he was just telling you what he thought you wanted to hear, what the voters of massachusetts wanted to hear what the olympic committee the federal government wanted to hear just to get the success as he defined it at that moment? >> certainly, my first impression was--and that was over a period of a couple of years was that he really was that moderate reasonable person, as was his wife ann romney. now when i see a man who has been listening to his handlers, but you can't blame it on his handlers. he has chosen to do this. the conclusion that anybody has to draw--just look at his public record. don't listen to me, who has dealt with him personally. he has been all over the place
are uninhabitable could very well drop off, which could cause tax rolls, which could cause a real revenue problem for the municipality. it's going to be a serious problem. >> mr. mayor, the boardwalk and the beach is the beach gone? is it damaged? is it recoverable? >> it varies in different places but the beach right now we've always had sand dunes in front of the boardwalk. it's been a natural barrier. itright now the boardwalk the boards are gone, but the pilings are ten feet in the air which means eight feet or ten feet of sand dune are gone, and then below that another ten feet. we've lost sand from the beach level. the water is lapping up. if we had another storm right now, the whole ocean is going to be in the streets. >> eliot: mayor keleher thank you for joining us. our thoughts and prayers are with you. >> i appreciate it. >> eliot: wow, that is devastation. you look at those pictures, parts of new york city looks like that. my goodness, you see complete--communities completely gone. >> that's exactly right. the thing with new york city, it has the wherewithal to recoop it's losses beca
, that's a more efficient use of tax dollars. >> cenk: michael, there is no such republican plan. the only plan that exists is to cut fema. there is no plan to add money to the local levels. >> i'm not here to defend that. or argue it. i'm here to tell you from -- yeah, i'm a republican and yes i'm a partisan. here's how it really works and what we really ought to be doing. >> cenk: michael, one last thing. if you're a voter throughout and you're worried about these disasters and they seem to be happening at a quicker pace now and one guy seems to have handled things fairly well and says i'm going to continue to do that and another guy says i don't really even believe in fema at the federal. >> eliot: and i don't have a plan to make anything better at the state or local. >> eliot: so good luck to you. as a voter which guy would you go for? >> look, i don't think that romney's rhetoric really is that. he may think that we need more efficiently or spend their money and i think we should. i think to the extent we
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)